Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Social Choice and Welfare 2/2022

14.03.2022 | Original Paper

Monotonicity violations under plurality with a runoff: the case of French presidential elections

verfasst von: Umut Keskin, M. Remzi Sanver, H. Berkay Tosunlu

Erschienen in: Social Choice and Welfare | Ausgabe 2/2022

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

A voting rule is monotonic if a winning candidate never becomes a loser by being raised in voters’ rankings of candidates, ceteris paribus. Plurality with a runoff is known to fail monotonicity. To see how widespread this failure is, we focus on French presidential elections since 1965. We identify mathematical conditions that allow a logically conceivable scenario of vote shifts between candidates that may lead to a monotonicity violation. We show that eight among the ten elections held since 1965 (those in 1965 and 1974 being the exceptions) exhibit this theoretical vulnerability. To be sure, the conceived scenario of vote shifts that enables a monotonicity violation may not be plausible under the political context of the considered election. Thus, we analyze the political landscape of these eight elections and argue that for two of them (2002 and 2007 elections), the monotonicity violation scenario was plausible within the conjuncture of the time.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Fußnoten
1
Black (1958) and Brams and Fishburn (2002) give a comprehensive account of this condition, which should be distinguished from other stronger monotonicity conditions that are more oriented to the implementability of collective choice rules. For those different monotonicities of implementation theory, once can see Maskin and Sjöström (2002).
 
2
Felsenthal and Nurmi (2017) present a detailed account of monotonicity failures.
 
3
See Doron and Kronick (1977) for arguments against using non-monotonic voting rules.
 
4
Golder (2005) discusses the use of PwR in different elections around the world.
 
5
The qualification “restricted” implicitly assumes that voters’ preferences do not change between the two rounds and that strategic voting is not a concern. See Conitzer and Sandholm (2005) for a formalization of PwR as a protocol.
 
6
Under this adaptation that overlooks preferences, the question on whether voters’ preferences change between the two rounds vanish. In a similar vein, strategic voting is not a concern. See Footnote 5.
 
7
Although we postpone the discussion on the runoff outcome to the next section where we use real election data, we note right away that the condition “\({C}_{1}\) not exceeding the threshold of 50 votes” ensures that \({C}_{1}\) does not become the PwR winner without needing a runoff.
 
8
on that particularly prevails when the elec.
 
9
Although in French politics candidates typically stand out more than the party they are associated with, to be more informative to a larger audience, we gave the party names in the tables and used their English translations.
 
15
Although the inequality in Proposition 1 requires \(x\) < 30.06, the actual vote of Chirac which is 19.94 is the binding upper bound on \(x\). This issue applies to the 1995, 2002 and 2017 elections as well.
 
21
Some changes may be more unlikely than others but for the purpose of our analysis a single category that reflects unlikeliness suffices.
 
22
Among the reasons for such a shift was the steady move of Christian west towards left and the popularity of socialism among youngsters who vote for the first time in 1981.
 
28
At the end of our analysis, we are able to qualify the 2002 election as one which is practically open to an upward 1.1 monotonicity violation.Thus, we do not analyze the plausibility of other 1.k violation scenarios for k > 1.
 
33
We thank an anonymous referee for suggesting this perspective.
 
34
A well-known instance of manipulative vote transfers under non-monotonic voting rules is the referendum in Italy held on 12 June 2005 under the (non-monotonic) majority with quorum rule, where the Catholic Church, being against the withdrawal of a law dealing with medically assisted procreation, asked its supporters to abstain rather than casting a negative vote (Houy (2009)).
 
Literatur
Zurück zum Zitat Black D (1958) The Theory of Committees and Elections. Springer, New York Black D (1958) The Theory of Committees and Elections. Springer, New York
Zurück zum Zitat Bradley P (1995) STV and monotonicity: a hands-on assessment. Representation 33(2):46–47CrossRef Bradley P (1995) STV and monotonicity: a hands-on assessment. Representation 33(2):46–47CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Brams SJ, Fishburn PC (2002) Voting procedures. In: Arrow JK, Sen AK, Suzumura K (eds) Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 173–236CrossRef Brams SJ, Fishburn PC (2002) Voting procedures. In: Arrow JK, Sen AK, Suzumura K (eds) Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 173–236CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Conitzer V, Sandholm T (2005) Communication complexity of common voting rules. In: Proceedings of the 6th ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce, 78–87 Conitzer V, Sandholm T (2005) Communication complexity of common voting rules. In: Proceedings of the 6th ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce, 78–87
Zurück zum Zitat Criddle B, Bell DS (1981) The 1981 French elections: the victory of the left. The World Today 37(7/8):282–292 Criddle B, Bell DS (1981) The 1981 French elections: the victory of the left. The World Today 37(7/8):282–292
Zurück zum Zitat Doron G, Kronick R (1977) Single transferable vote: an example of perverse social choice function. Am J Polit Sci 21:303–311CrossRef Doron G, Kronick R (1977) Single transferable vote: an example of perverse social choice function. Am J Polit Sci 21:303–311CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Durand C, Blais A, Larochelle M (2004) The polls in the 2002 French presidential election: an autopsy. Public Opin Q 68(4):602–622CrossRef Durand C, Blais A, Larochelle M (2004) The polls in the 2002 French presidential election: an autopsy. Public Opin Q 68(4):602–622CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Felsenthal DS, Nurmi H (2017) Monotonicity failures afflicting procedures for electing a single candidate. Springer, SwitzerlandCrossRef Felsenthal DS, Nurmi H (2017) Monotonicity failures afflicting procedures for electing a single candidate. Springer, SwitzerlandCrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Frears J (1988) The 1988 French presidential election. Gov Oppos 23(3):276–289CrossRef Frears J (1988) The 1988 French presidential election. Gov Oppos 23(3):276–289CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Golder M (2005) Democratic electoral systems around the world, 1946–2000. Elect Stud 24:103–121CrossRef Golder M (2005) Democratic electoral systems around the world, 1946–2000. Elect Stud 24:103–121CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Houy NA (2009) Characterization of majority voting rules with quorums. Theor Decis 67:295–301CrossRef Houy NA (2009) Characterization of majority voting rules with quorums. Theor Decis 67:295–301CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Keskin U, Sanver MR, Tosunlu HB (2020) Recovering non-monotonicity problems of voting rules. Social Choice and Welfare. Forthcoming Keskin U, Sanver MR, Tosunlu HB (2020) Recovering non-monotonicity problems of voting rules. Social Choice and Welfare. Forthcoming
Zurück zum Zitat Lepelley D, Chantreuil F, Berg S (1996) The likelihood of monotonicity paradoxes in run-off elections. Math Soc Sci 31(3):133–146CrossRef Lepelley D, Chantreuil F, Berg S (1996) The likelihood of monotonicity paradoxes in run-off elections. Math Soc Sci 31(3):133–146CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Maskin E, Sjöström T (2002) Implementation theory. Handb Soc Choice Welf 1:237–288CrossRef Maskin E, Sjöström T (2002) Implementation theory. Handb Soc Choice Welf 1:237–288CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Miller NR (2017) Closeness matters: monotonicity failure in IRV elections with three candidates. Public Choice 173(1–2):91–108CrossRef Miller NR (2017) Closeness matters: monotonicity failure in IRV elections with three candidates. Public Choice 173(1–2):91–108CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Muller E, Satterthwaite MA (1977) The equivalence of strong positive association and strategy-proofness. J Econ Theory 14(2):412–418CrossRef Muller E, Satterthwaite MA (1977) The equivalence of strong positive association and strategy-proofness. J Econ Theory 14(2):412–418CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Ornstein JT, Norman RZ (2014) Frequency of monotonicity failure under Instant Runoff Voting: estimates based on a spatial model of elections. Public Choice 161(1–2):1–9CrossRef Ornstein JT, Norman RZ (2014) Frequency of monotonicity failure under Instant Runoff Voting: estimates based on a spatial model of elections. Public Choice 161(1–2):1–9CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Penniman H (1969) French elections, 1969. World Affairs 132(2):101–117 Penniman H (1969) French elections, 1969. World Affairs 132(2):101–117
Zurück zum Zitat Quas A (2004) Anomalous outcomes in preferential voting. Stochastics Dyn 04(1):95–105CrossRef Quas A (2004) Anomalous outcomes in preferential voting. Stochastics Dyn 04(1):95–105CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Sauger N (2007) The French legislative and presidential elections of 2007. West Eur Polit 30(5):1166–1175CrossRef Sauger N (2007) The French legislative and presidential elections of 2007. West Eur Polit 30(5):1166–1175CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Smith JH (1973) Aggregation of preferences with variable electorate. Econometrica 41(6):1027–1041CrossRef Smith JH (1973) Aggregation of preferences with variable electorate. Econometrica 41(6):1027–1041CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Van der Straeten K, Laslier JF, Blais A (2013) Vote au pluriel: how people vote when offered to vote under different rules. Polit Sci Polit 46(2):324–328CrossRef Van der Straeten K, Laslier JF, Blais A (2013) Vote au pluriel: how people vote when offered to vote under different rules. Polit Sci Polit 46(2):324–328CrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Monotonicity violations under plurality with a runoff: the case of French presidential elections
verfasst von
Umut Keskin
M. Remzi Sanver
H. Berkay Tosunlu
Publikationsdatum
14.03.2022
Verlag
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in
Social Choice and Welfare / Ausgabe 2/2022
Print ISSN: 0176-1714
Elektronische ISSN: 1432-217X
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00355-022-01397-4

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 2/2022

Social Choice and Welfare 2/2022 Zur Ausgabe

Premium Partner